This is the forum for discussion of all cricketing issues and news. Here you will find frank analysis and opinion on subjects ranging from selection policies, favourite cricketers and match post-mortems right through to dressing room and cricket board fiascos.

bolero wrote:Ok some facts on SG and Kookaburra Ball as stated by former Indian opener Akash Chopra, now a noted commentator and analyst.

Decoding the SG and Kookaburra

AAKASH CHOPRA

Dear readers,

A couple of years ago the BCCI decided to use Kookaburra balls in the Duleep Trophy to give our domestic players a feel of this type of ball, as at the international level, except for the Test cricket played in India and England, this ball is commonly used.

We, in India, use the SG Test ball and England plays with either a Duke or a Readers ball (these two are quite similar to the SG Test balls used in India). But even that is restricted only to the red balls because the shorter formats all over the world are played with the white Kookaburra ball.

It was exactly the same in the Indian domestic circuit till the introduction of the Kookaburra ball for the Duleep Trophy. The longer format, before this move, was played with the SG Test ball and the one-day matches with the white Kookaburra ball.

Every time the Indian team tours overseas we hear a lot about the difficulty our players face in getting used to the Kookaburra ball in the Test matches. One might just wonder what the fuss is all about. After all it's the same leather ball; the size, shape and the weight are exactly the same, regardless of the brand. All this is true, but let me assure you that there's a huge difference in the way different balls behave in the air and off the surface.

I'll start with the SG Test ball first, which has a more pronounced seam and which remains pronounced for almost the entire length of the innings. The pronounced seam helps the faster bowlers release the ball in an upright seam position, as it doesn't wobble much after the release, and it helps the spinners grip the ball better and also get purchase off the pitch because the seam enables the ball to grip the surface.

The SG Test ball doesn't swing much when it's new but as soon as one side (half) of the ball becomes shinier than the other, it starts swinging appreciably. The good thing for the bowlers is that the shine lasts longer and hence helps both the quicker bowlers as well as the slower ones. The quicker men get swing in the air and the slower bowlers get the essential drift.

Though the Kookaburra ball also has a pronounced seam, it fades away rather quickly. The new ball does all kinds of things in the air and off the surface but once the seam gets embedded in the surface (which happens too quickly for the bowlers' liking), it ceases to move quite as much. The lack of a pronounced seam not only makes it difficult for spinners to grip the ball but it also denies them purchase off the surface because the ball, instead of gripping the turf, just skids along. Finger spinners are the worst hit in this case and hence have to put a lot of revolutions (we call it work) on the ball to get something off the track. Wrist spinners face no such problem as they don't rely on the seam to grip the surface to get the desired amount of spin. One can always put more work on the ball with the wrist as compared to the fingers.

Now, there's a particular way to bowl with different balls. The faster bowlers who release the ball instead of hitting the deck are fairly successful with the SG Test ball. Since the shine stays for longer and so does the pronounced seam, the ball swings and seams the whole day if one can release the ball with an upright seam on a regular basis.

On the contrary, the Kookaburra ball doesn't swing even half as much once it gets old. One must hit the surface hard to get something out of it. The typical swing bowlers are easy picking as the ball doesn't do much in the air or off the surface once it loses its shine.

In this blog, I've tried to explain the basic difference in the two different brands of balls used in Indian cricket. Now, how much of it has helped i.e. has it helped and how is it handled at the ground level... I shall tell you some interesting facts and tales about that in the next post.

Till then, goodbye.

P.S. I wanted to share a small detail with you guys. The reviews of my book Beyond the Blues are out and the initial signs are very encouraging, almost all of them have written good things about the book. I'm assuming that it's true. Tx.

Former India opener Aakash Chopra is the author of Out of the Blue, an account of Rajasthan's 2010-11 Ranji Trophy victory.

bolero wrote:Ok some facts on SG and Kookaburra Ball as stated by former Indian opener Akash Chopra, now a noted commentator and analyst.

Decoding the SG and Kookaburra

AAKASH CHOPRA

Dear readers,

A couple of years ago the BCCI decided to use Kookaburra balls in the Duleep Trophy to give our domestic players a feel of this type of ball, as at the international level, except for the Test cricket played in India and England, this ball is commonly used.

We, in India, use the SG Test ball and England plays with either a Duke or a Readers ball (these two are quite similar to the SG Test balls used in India). But even that is restricted only to the red balls because the shorter formats all over the world are played with the white Kookaburra ball.

It was exactly the same in the Indian domestic circuit till the introduction of the Kookaburra ball for the Duleep Trophy. The longer format, before this move, was played with the SG Test ball and the one-day matches with the white Kookaburra ball.

Every time the Indian team tours overseas we hear a lot about the difficulty our players face in getting used to the Kookaburra ball in the Test matches. One might just wonder what the fuss is all about. After all it's the same leather ball; the size, shape and the weight are exactly the same, regardless of the brand. All this is true, but let me assure you that there's a huge difference in the way different balls behave in the air and off the surface.

I'll start with the SG Test ball first, which has a more pronounced seam and which remains pronounced for almost the entire length of the innings. The pronounced seam helps the faster bowlers release the ball in an upright seam position, as it doesn't wobble much after the release, and it helps the spinners grip the ball better and also get purchase off the pitch because the seam enables the ball to grip the surface.

The SG Test ball doesn't swing much when it's new but as soon as one side (half) of the ball becomes shinier than the other, it starts swinging appreciably. The good thing for the bowlers is that the shine lasts longer and hence helps both the quicker bowlers as well as the slower ones. The quicker men get swing in the air and the slower bowlers get the essential drift.

Though the Kookaburra ball also has a pronounced seam, it fades away rather quickly. The new ball does all kinds of things in the air and off the surface but once the seam gets embedded in the surface (which happens too quickly for the bowlers' liking), it ceases to move quite as much. The lack of a pronounced seam not only makes it difficult for spinners to grip the ball but it also denies them purchase off the surface because the ball, instead of gripping the turf, just skids along. Finger spinners are the worst hit in this case and hence have to put a lot of revolutions (we call it work) on the ball to get something off the track. Wrist spinners face no such problem as they don't rely on the seam to grip the surface to get the desired amount of spin. One can always put more work on the ball with the wrist as compared to the fingers.

Now, there's a particular way to bowl with different balls. The faster bowlers who release the ball instead of hitting the deck are fairly successful with the SG Test ball. Since the shine stays for longer and so does the pronounced seam, the ball swings and seams the whole day if one can release the ball with an upright seam on a regular basis.

On the contrary, the Kookaburra ball doesn't swing even half as much once it gets old. One must hit the surface hard to get something out of it. The typical swing bowlers are easy picking as the ball doesn't do much in the air or off the surface once it loses its shine.

In this blog, I've tried to explain the basic difference in the two different brands of balls used in Indian cricket. Now, how much of it has helped i.e. has it helped and how is it handled at the ground level... I shall tell you some interesting facts and tales about that in the next post.

Till then, goodbye.

P.S. I wanted to share a small detail with you guys. The reviews of my book Beyond the Blues are out and the initial signs are very encouraging, almost all of them have written good things about the book. I'm assuming that it's true. Tx.

Former India opener Aakash Chopra is the author of Out of the Blue, an account of Rajasthan's 2010-11 Ranji Trophy victory.

“Cricket Australia told me that the first ball we produced for them was far too good. They told me to go away and try and make it a bit more destructible. It was bullet proof with the surface finishes we had put on it so we had to adapt it.”

But when trialled over the last four summers in the Futures League in Australia, and in the under 19 and under 17 championships, a problem emerged. "They had too much lacquer on them and didn't wear enough," said Australia's high performance manager Pat Howard, "so we didn't get the value of seeing how the older ball performed."

So the Duke balls were sent back and the design was adapted. Duke appears to be happy to tinker with the ball as requested by Cricket Australia.

As well as the comparative reduction in individual centuries – 19 against the red Kookaburra (6.3 per round of matches) versus 18 in total in preliminary Shield rounds using the Dukes (3.6 per round) – suggesting that batters found it tougher against the English ball that is reputed to swing further and retain its hardness longer. CA announced last October they had worked with UK-based manufacturer to produce a ball that mirrored the performance of the English version, but was designed to suit harsher Australian conditions, to help the nation's top-level domestic batters and bowlers better adapt to the idiosyncrasies of the Dukes.

"I think the Dukes is a far superior cricket ball to the Kookaburra in terms of the quality of contest between bat and ball," he said. "They certainly stay in shape, they're harder for longer, they consistently swing, there's a little bit there for the bowlers all day if you're good enough to bowl well, but you can get some runs if you're disciplined with the bat.

Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsmanA third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

Katto wrote:We were talking about Australian conditions, but move the goalposts all you want Piddles.

Katto, we're done here.

You won already. You announced and proclaimed your victory already. This victory includes all topics being discussed that the team has control over including pitch preparation and balls used.

I don't want to be in any back and forth with you.

So instead about worrying about me or our discussion - go look at what the phrase 'move the goalposts' means.

My only claim was that Australian curators generally don't doctor wickets to suit the home team nor make pitches to order by the home team captain. You try to obfuscate the argument by talking about balls. Australia has used the same ball manufacturer in tests for 70 years FFS.The Duke ball as observed by players doesn't behave any different in Australian conditions to make batting more difficult.Swing is caused by weather conditions and the ability of the bowler. Typically these conditions aren't as favourable in Australia as some other parts of the world. South Africa and NZ use the same ball as Australia but you don't hear anyone complaining about their ball choice.

You won already. You announced and proclaimed your victory already. This victory includes all topics being discussed that the team has control over including pitch preparation and balls used.

I don't want to be in any back and forth with you.

So instead about worrying about me or our discussion - go look at what the phrase 'move the goalposts' means.

My only claim was that Australian curators generally don't doctor wickets to suit the home team nor make pitches to order by the home team captain. You try to obfuscate the argument by talking about balls. Australia has used the same ball manufacturer in tests for 70 years FFS.The Duke ball as observed by players doesn't behave any different in Australian conditions to make batting more difficult.Swing is caused by weather conditions and the ability of the bowler. Typically these conditions aren't as favourable in Australia as some other parts of the world. South Africa and NZ use the same ball as Australia but you don't hear anyone complaining about their ball choice.

Katto, no point addressing your reply to me.

We're done. You won.

I couldn't care less what you have to say further on the matter or what you think I argued.

Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsmanA third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

Katto wrote:My only claim was that Australian curators generally don't doctor wickets to suit the home team nor make pitches to order by the home team captain. You try to obfuscate the argument by talking about balls. Australia has used the same ball manufacturer in tests for 70 years FFS.The Duke ball as observed by players doesn't behave any different in Australian conditions to make batting more difficult.Swing is caused by weather conditions and the ability of the bowler. Typically these conditions aren't as favourable in Australia as some other parts of the world. South Africa and NZ use the same ball as Australia but you don't hear anyone complaining about their ball choice.

Katto, no point addressing your reply to me.

We're done. You won.

I couldn't care less what you have to say further on the matter or what you think I argued.

So, where we were at about getting more competitive test cricket in Australia before Katto's winning contributions:

England just beat Safrica at home, something Aussie didn't do last year. While not a particularly famous batting line up just yet, they're far from second rate.

The issue is the home pitches[read conditions in host's control].

Australia can either green up the decks a bit more and or use a duke ball, and run the risk of losing a few games to England (and hopefully NZ) as well as give the Asian bowlers more of a chance than they have at present in Aus, which will help put on a spectacle of cricket and prepare its team to win in England far better.

Or it can continue with the status quo, and keep them flat and just leave the Asian, English and NZ attacks (pre Wagner) in the past with lil' hope and the most interesting series will be every few years when Safrica arrive for 3 tests only.

But - if you green the pitches up and use a duke ball, there will be a higher risk of upsets.

While India prepares it homes pitches to significantly suit itself, I don't blame Australia for also doing likewise. What I love most is when Bangladesh or Sri Lanka tour and India puts up faster seam friendlier pitches. I find that quite amusing. You don't see those tracks when Eng, SA, Aus or NZ tour India. Same thing has happened with KKR in the IPL, used to be a slow, spin heavy, tired pitch until this year when they bought a stack of seamers, suddenly it was green and fast, with good carry even for home IPL games.

So now changing this to a global phenomenon,

As cricket fans, would you rather see home conditions produce competitive test cricket or suit and assist home victories?

Personally I'd like to see for example NZ set spinning surfaces for Australia and SA especially, with either a Kookaburra or ideally a Duke ball, Lyon notwithstanding. I'm just sick of letting a home advantage go to SA and Aus and losing to them when they clearly have issues against spin.Alternatively I'm keen for NZ to play all test cricket on grassy wickets with the Duke ball for all visitors like England do.

But I am also getting a tad bored of watching teams tour India and Australia and being cannon fodder. And I understand for some Australian fans, the international test season is getting rather dull many years (unless SA tour). What is the position of Indian fans, do you enjoy and savour home dominance, or getting a bit bored with the regular one sided nature of the tours?

As this is beyond Australia, mods feel free to start and move it to a new thread.

Katto, please don't bother expecting me to respond on point to your replies to me, if any. You're just too much win for me.

Last edited by Paddles on Sat Dec 09, 2017 8:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsmanA third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.

Bolero there is a video in this clip of our National Performance Squad touring India in our just passed off season, training at the MRF Pace academy and playing a couple of games with local cricketers. Kyle Brazell is likely to be one of those talented youth cricketers I spoke of to tour the sub continent and play in a domestic competition in the near future.Did you watch that clip Bolero?

Last edited by baggygreenmania on Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

How important is it for a cricketer to play at Australia's home of cricket.. the SCG. (will probably upset our Bleak City neibors) Very important I imagine when it is likely the only time you will grace the hallowed turf in your career.. So is it worth playing there to an empty crowd? That was the problem facing teams from the Regional Bash T2O grand final last Sunday. Surely it would have been more practical playing the match in Newcastle, Dubbo or Tamworth.. where they would have at least have gotten a decent crowd. For the record the Newcastle Blasters defeated the Orana Outlaws.

Bolero there is a video in this clip of our National Performance Squad touring India in our just passed off season, training at the MRF Pace academy and playing a couple of games with local cricketers. Kyle Brazell is likely to be one of those talented youth cricketers I spoke of to tour the sub continent and play in a domestic competition in the near future.

Bolero there is a video in this clip of our National Performance Squad touring India in our just passed off season, training at the MRF Pace academy and playing a couple of games with local cricketers. Kyle Brazell is likely to be one of those talented youth cricketers I spoke of to tour the sub continent and play in a domestic competition in the near future.

Australia has announced a very exciting squad for the U19 WC. Lead by very highly rated batsman Jason Sangha who comes off 133 for an CA11 against the touring English side and includes a number of players with List A experience, including Will Sutherland(VC) son of CA CEO James, Xavier Bartlett, Jack Edwards, Zak Evans, Jonathon Merlo, Param Uppal. Max Bryant.Others in the squad include Steve Waughs son Austin and talented young Leggie Lloyd Pope,

A couple of surprise omissions Mick in Ryan Hackney who toppd the run scoring in the nationals and Mac Harvey (nephew of Ian). How did Austin Waugh get a cap..with just 149 @22 and 7 w. Also Zac Evans with 4w @45. The 2018 WC is being held in NZ.. last time it was held in the Land of the Long White Cloud was I understand 2010 when the Mitch Marsh led Aussies took home the trophy.

baggygreenmania wrote:Yes Mick an exciting young group of talents. A couple of surprise omissions in Ryan Hackney and Mac Harvey (nephew of Ian) The 2018 WC is being held in NZ.. last time it was held in the Land of the Long White Cloud was I understand 2010 when the Mitch Marsh led Aussies took home the trophy.

Good question. CAX1 all rounder Oliver Davies was unlucky not making the WC squad.. as Jason Sangha did two years ago. Fine figures in the nationals of 223 @44 + 9 @ 21. Dominic O'Shannessy is only 15. Got Hackney with a beauty.

Young giant Blues (Metro) all rounder Jack Edwards came, saw and conquered a gallant CAX1 to win the National U19 final in Hobart yesterday. Edwards, one of the youngest players chosen for next Marchs U19 WC in NZ,tamed the CAX1 attack with his power, timing, and precision to post 147. New WC batsman/keeper Baxter Holt offered strong support with a polished 44.

Mick180461 wrote:Do you want to be a bit more specific about why we are talking about Alderman and Dodemaide. As in what context?

As in, why did they not reach the heights of other top.Australian fast bowlers ? Were they not good enough or victim of.selection policy ?

Alderman got old and retired. During his career he suffered a serious injury from a pitch invasion in Perth in 1982 which set him back. He also went on the rebel tour - so that probably accounted for about 5 years out of his (official) international career. The injury probably cut down his pace (needed in Australia), but he was still effective in England.

Dodemaide lost his outswinger for some inexplicable reason and never regained his place in the Australian team again.

Mick180461 wrote:Do you want to be a bit more specific about why we are talking about Alderman and Dodemaide. As in what context?

As in, why did they not reach the heights of other top.Australian fast bowlers ? Were they not good enough or victim of.selection policy ?

Alderman probably not quite quick enough for Australian pitches to be a truly top quality bowler in Australia. Unplayable in England, took 83 wkts in 10 tests there. One of the great what ifs along with Greg Chappell in England in 81 is Alderman in England in 85, certainly England would not have dominated with the bat in 85 to the same degree if Alderman had been there. Alderman would have been one of the 1st players picked for Australia in the 85-87 period. Alderman's record of 170 wkts @ 27 is still very respectable. Dodemaide wasn't the worst but there was simply 1/2 dozen better Bowlers around such as Alderman, Lawson, Hughes, McDermott, Reid, Rackeman and Whitney.

I’m graciously stepping into your forum thread to congratulate you in destroying us yet again in your home conditions with half our bowlers injured and using a batsman that’s been injected with bradmans genetic material in an unsportsmanlike attempt at gamesmanship.

Then I’m going right out the door. And I’m stealing all your lightbulbs as I go.

baggygreenmania wrote:A couple of surprise omissions Mick in Ryan Hackney who toppd the run scoring in the nationals and Mac Harvey (nephew of Ian). How did Austin Waugh get a cap..with just 149 @22 and 7 w. Also Zac Evans with 4w @45. The 2018 WC is being held in NZ.. last time it was held in the Land of the Long White Cloud was I understand 2010 when the Mitch Marsh led Aussies took home the trophy.

Agree Baggers on Waugh also when was the last time Will Sutherland played? I don't think he played in the Nationals. Xavier Bartlett has hardly been setting the world on fire in the futures league and I don't think he played either, so he's lucky too. Thomas Rogers (Vic) topped the runs in the Nationals and also missed out. I think the selectors made a mistake on Zak Evans, maybe they thought he was Wilson McGillivray the leading wicket-taker with 16 wickets @12. Also surprised by Ryan Hadley's selection as well, only 6 wickets from 7 matches, Nathan McSweeney only took 8 wickets from 7 matches but I suppose at an average of 18 Nathan was selected for economy. I'm starting to think the selectors don't give much credence to the Nationals anymore, but rather who they think may have potential, possibly who they are related to.

An interesting comment was made to me by a qualified financial adviser a few days ago. He would advise these young players who are overlooked regardless of on field performances, to concentrate on doing the world circuit T20 comps and do the necessary training in that field. Forget about Sheffield Shield when they they could be playing the Bangladesh Premier League, SRI LANKA PREMIER LEAGUE or Hong Kong T20 Blitz or even Everest Premier League which all run at the same time. Not to mention the IPL. That's where the real money is and the likely hood that they will get a baggy green is unlikely as you can see from Waugh and Sutherland inclusion in this squad, its currently about who you know. A specific player he mentioned was Lynn as an example, possibly Burns which is a shame that we could lose these players, but as he said Woolworths and Coles don't exchange a state cap for food for the family. It will be interesting to see where players like Rogers, Jack White, Aaron Hardie, Matthew Spoors, Angus Lovell who have all performed at the championships but are overlooked in favour of others who didn't perform or didn't play. After all if Sangha is included why wasn't Rogers, Hackney, White, Harvey who all performed better than him at the Nationals.

If financial advisers are saying this it explains Chris Lynn's recent rejection of the Queensland Cricket offer to play shield cricket and Chris is just the first of many to come, and who can blame him, with the last T20 world cup he was snubbed by selectors, who went with Smith, Khawaja, Warner, Finch, M Marsh who have done nothing in the Big Bash if they play at all, selected based on reputation not performance, and it showed when we got knocked out, so why shouldn't he give the middle finger to CA and chase the money. The loser here isn't Chris Lynn, it's Australian cricket which ultimately ends up with 2nd rate cricketers in the baggy green, which we are starting to see in other world teams. The current England side would struggle to beat a state futures league team, but their T20 side made the final with only 2 players currently touring here Root and Ali.

Mike astounding that Thomas Rogers and Ryan Hackney did not make the squad. This is Hackney's second solid nationals. I hate it when blokes are picked on reputation like Waugh rather than performance as it sends a bad signal to young cricketers trying to make their way. Jack White would have been a good investment in Tasmanian cricket too. What is it with selectors. Where is the consistency? Our national panel would admit it has made some wrong calls over recent times..but hats off to its outside the box Ashes selections Cam Bancroft, the Marsh brothers and above all Tim Paine. All, other than Bancroft, have performed well above expectation.

Last edited by baggygreenmania on Tue Dec 19, 2017 1:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

He would advise these young players who are overlooked regardless of on field performances, to concentrate on doing the world circuit T20 comps and do the necessary training in that field. Forget about Sheffield Shield

Problem I see with that idea Mike is most young cricketers aspire to wear the Baggy Green and are prepared to face whatever obstacles are in their way to achieve that dream.. Yes from a financial standpoint playing the T20 circuit is the way to go. But do they feel fulfilled. Do they get the same adrenaline rush as donning the whites and playing for their state and then if good enuff Test match cricket for their country?

Boycs wrote:I’m graciously stepping into your forum thread to congratulate you in destroying us yet again in your home conditions with half our bowlers injured and using a batsman that’s been injected with bradmans genetic material in an unsportsmanlike attempt at gamesmanship.

Then I’m going right out the door. And I’m stealing all your lightbulbs as I go.

But seriously. Well played. Result was never in doubt.

That is gracious of you Boycs. Take issue with 'lost half our bowlers'. You still had two blokes with almost 1000 Test wickets between them at your disposal. Gotta say Broad went missing in action. Hey put back those lite bulbs please as the thread is now in darkness... until the BBL finishes that is.

I don't normally post on this thread, as my knowledge of current Aussie cricket is very limited.I do however read every post on this thread - it's possibly my favourite thread here (along with Paddles' "cloud" thread on NZ cricket).There's a lot I learn from these threads. I'd like similar threads on cricket in other countries, but maybe we don't have the knowledge for this yet (except maybe BCCI).

Anyway, the reason I'm posting here is to comment on the very interesting point brought up by Mike.Baggy green vs lucrative league cricket.

You choose cricket as a profession because you believe you have the ability to earn your livelihood (and more!) through it.

If you're dependent on one employer (your cricket board), you've anyway severely limited your options, and left yourself at the mercy of such employer.

Ok, so you might be in favour today, but what's to say you won't be out of favour tomorrow?

Yes, this employer is the only one in the position to fulfil your dream of donning national colours, but (a) you're competing with many others, and (b) what's to say, even if you perform, you're not overlooked?

So I think every commercially-savvy cricketer would hedge his bets. Yes, try to earn the baggy green (in case of Australia) but don't get so hung up on it that you are left at the mercy of that one employer, and subject to his whims and fancies.

Thankfully, there are plenty of other even more lucrative avenues out there nowadays - so try to be the best you can, so that you are very much in demand in those circuits. If you keep performing, you will not only be well rewarded financially, it will also be hard for your own cricket board to ignore you. Unless they have a vested interest in sabotaging your career (which I doubt CA has), they will, sooner or later, give you the nod.

That way, you get to make loads of money AND wear the baggy green.

Worst case, if you still get ignored by CA, you still have loads of money - which you fully deserve, for your performances.

Bottom line is, don't get stuck in a rut because of any ideological hangups about the baggy green being the pinnacle of one's achievement. Yes, it might well be - but it's not in your control, and you might just find yourself on the outside, for no fault of yours. If you've been so obsessed by it that you've not tried other channels, you'll be left with nothing. No baggy green, no money. That would be really sad.

Totally agree Raja, and Cricket Australia will fine you if you don't do your homework. We all live in a world where we have been by-passed for a promotion by someone who is not as deserving. Baggers you may think that all cricketers aspire to wear the baggy green or even to be selected to represent Australia in the junior ranks, and you're not wrong, most kids do, but please explain to Thomas Rogers and Ryan Hackney, who have performed amazingly well, they can't do any more then they have, why they didn't make the cut, and how can they improve because they see that they made more runs at a better average than Sangha, who was selected. You can't say to them perform worse than you are to match Sangha's performance. Explain to Wilson McGillivray the leading wicket-taker with 16 wickets @12 why he didn't make the side but Ryan Hadley Jason Ralston and Nathan McSweeney did with poorer performances, Wilson must be gutted, as would Lawrence Neil-Smith, Donal Whyte and Aaron Hardie. These kids do want to make a career from cricket but what message does it give those who perform when players like Waugh and Sutherland walk into rep side with no performance. Baggers you say it all the time that CA groom particular players for the future, Sangha, Waugh, Sutherland Param Uppal are the current ones and the others regardless of how they perform are overlooked, and that will continue throughout their careers, as it has in the past, as it will in the future. Look at the current Australian side, the selectors were jumping up and down after South Africa defeated us that they were going to make changes and give some youth an opportunity and we all celebrated, there was hope for some of these players. Now look at the side, it's the same as the one that was defeated by South Africa, same batsmen, same bowlers. The reason South Africa won the series out here is because Steve Smith failed in both tests South Africa won, pure and simple, the others performed exactly as they do now. These kids have to decide how much is the dream of a baggy green worth. They may never achieve a baggy green, but a couple of years in the IPL sets them up for life. Ask Aaron Finch.

Mike, I'd be highly surprised if Finch hasn't made a lot more money from his CA contracts (probably before match fees too) than his IPL earnings.

Australia, England and India have little to fear from the leagues, even KP wanted to return to playing for England, and he's a fairly good earner on the league curcuit.

The leagues are keeping the Warnes, Gilchrists, Hodges and Hoggys in t20 cricket well after their intl test and 50 over careers are done. This seems to be the biggest apparent change as more and more players cross the 40 and still pro threshold that used to be the reserve of English county pros - not Australians

Law 31.6 - benefit of the doubt for an dismissal appeal goes to the batsmanA third umpire call for a run out or stumping is a referral, not a review.